国际妇产科学杂志 ›› 2025, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (4): 394-401.doi: 10.12280/gjfckx.20250032

• 产科生理及产科疾病:论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

产前诊断羊水细胞Y染色体异常七例分析

周静, 季修庆, 李璃, 刘安, 王玉国, 周冉, 许争峰()   

  1. 210004 南京医科大学附属妇产医院(南京市妇幼保健院)产前诊断中心
  • 收稿日期:2025-01-10 出版日期:2025-08-15 发布日期:2025-09-08
  • 通讯作者: 许争峰,E-mail:zhengfeng_xu_nj@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家重点研发计划(2022YFC2703403)

Prenatal Diagnosis of Y Chromosome Abnormalities in Amniotic Fluid Cells: A Case Series of 7 Cases

ZHOU Jing, JI Xiu-qing, LI Li, LIU An, WANG Yu-guo, ZHOU Ran, XU Zheng-feng()   

  1. Department of Prenatal Diagnosis, Women′s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University (Nanjing Women and Children′s Healthcare Hospital), Nanjing 210004, China
  • Received:2025-01-10 Published:2025-08-15 Online:2025-09-08
  • Contact: XU Zheng-feng, E-mail: zhengfeng_xu_nj@163.com

摘要:

目的:分析7例产前检测羊水细胞提示Y染色体异常的病例,总结不同检测方法结果之间的联系,合理判读结果以指导产前遗传咨询。方法:收集产前检测提示Y染色体异常的7例病例资料,产前检测方式包括羊水细胞染色体核型分析、染色体微阵列分析、多重连接探针扩增技术、荧光原位杂交技术和光学基因组图谱分析技术,根据各检测方法的特点和检测结果综合判断得出最接近真实的染色体结果。结果:7例Y染色体异常病例中,有6例为嵌合体(病例2除外)。病例1、2、6、7的各检测方法所提示Y染色体异常的情况基本一致,而病例3、4、5的各检测方法出现了不同的结果。结论:在胎儿染色体的检查中,为了避免Y染色体结果的评估出现偏颇,建议进行以染色体核型分析为基础,叠加其他各种分子和细胞遗传学检测的方式,使Y染色体的信息能得到更全面的体现。临床医生需根据Y染色体异常的类型和各检测方法的结果,综合评估胎儿出生后可能出现的临床表现,从而做出正确的临床指导。

关键词: 产前诊断, Y染色体, 性染色体畸变, 核型分析, 微阵列分析, 遗传咨询

Abstract:

Objective: To analyze 7 cases of Y chromosome abnormalities detected in amniotic fluid cells through prenatal testing, evaluate the correlations between different testing methodologies, and provide guidance for accurate interpretation of results in prenatal genetic counseling. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 7 cases with prenatal testing diagnosis of Y chromosome abnormalities. Testing modalities included karyotype analysis, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA), multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and optical genome mapping(OGM). Comprehensive results were derived by integrating findings from these complementary techniques. Results: Among the 7 cases, 6 exhibited mosaics (excluding Case 2). Case 1, 2, 6, and 7 showed consistent Y chromosome abnormalities across all testing methods. In contrast, Case 3, 4, and 5 demonstrated discordant results between techniques. Conclusions: For accurate assessment of fetal Y chromosome status, we recommended a combined approach utilizing conventional karyotyping supplemented by molecular and cytogenetic methods(CMA/MLPA/FISH/OGM) to obtain comprehensive genomic information. Clinicians should correlate the specific type of Y chromosome abnormality with test results to predict potential postnatal phenotypes and provide appropriate genetic counseling.

Key words: Prenatal diagnosis, Y chromosome, Sex chromosome aberrations, Karyotyping, Microarray analysis, Genetic counseling